linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/6] x86, fpu: cleanups, introduce non-lazy FPU restore for xsave

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CA+55aFyjhLt0cJLOK+BoKaysA8KzSXj+L0gEpGxGU84Wok-5+A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sat, 25 Aug 2012 11:34:05 -0700
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>, mingo@...nel.org,
	andreas.herrmann3@....com, bp@...64.org, robert.richter@....com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] x86, fpu: cleanups, introduce non-lazy FPU restore
 for xsave

On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 2:33 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
> I have applied this to tip:x86/fpu, but I have also asked Suresh to
> prepare a followon patch to decouple eager save from the existence of
> the XSAVE instruction.  It seems pretty clear that eager save is a net
> benefit in the presence of the XSAVEOPT, but it isn't as clear for only
> having XSAVE, as far as I can tell.  Either way it would seem to be a
> policy decision that is somewhat separate from the exact instruction.

Agreed. It would also be good for testing bugs and/or performance for
both xsave and non-xsave cases.

          Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/